2020 Draftees questions

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

First, I thought I would have a little fun and see who everyone thinks will have the better career out of the 2020 Draftees.  Not better camp.  Not better rookie season.  BETTER CAREER.  Just curious what the fan base it thinking.

 

Second, I thought it would be fun to see what people think is more likely to happen with the draftees.

[w87r]

Taylor and Taylor.

 

Hopefully that first question ends up being Eason. Time will tell. If so, watch out. 2020's will be the Colts decade.

[Thunderbolt]

This is the year baby, buckle your seat belts!

[twfish]

32 minutes ago, w87r said:

Taylor and Taylor.

 

Hopefully that first question ends up being Eason. Time will tell. If so, watch out. 2020's will be the Colts decade.

As long as we have ballard for the next 10 years, then I see us as serious contendors.

[w87r]

7 minutes ago, twfish said:

As long as we have ballard for the next 10 years, then I see us as serious contendors.

Agreed.

 

I expect Taylor and Pittman to be solid. Like I said though, if Eason has the best career on that list, the league will be ours.

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

What is funny to me is the one response that I think is very realistic is getting no selections.  I think it is very likely that Blackmon takes Hookers spot before the end of the year.  Think about it, Hooker is a free agent and Blackmon is kinda supposed to take his place in 2021.  Wouldnt you want to see what you have in Blackmon.  Could be interesting. 

 

I also agree that I hope the answer to best career is Eason.  But time will tell.

[w87r]

1 minute ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

What is funny to me is the one response that I think is very realistic is getting no selections.  I think it is very likely that Blackmon takes Hookers spot before the end of the year.  Think about it, Hooker is a free agent and Blackmon is kinda supposed to take his place in 2021.  Wouldnt you want to see what you have in Blackmon.  Could be interesting. 

 

I also agree that I hope the answer to best career is Eason.  But time will tell.

I haven't given up on Hooker being back after this season. That coupled with the fact Blackmon is coming of the ACL. I know he will probably play, but I don't expect him to take Hooker's spot, unless Hooker is injured.

[RollerColt]

All in fun, Pittman seems like the real deal. We shall see what happens once the lights come on the field, but he certainly has the tools, mindset and pedigree to be a fantastic player for us. 

[Four2itus]

If I had to select career in order (by length?)...

 

Michael Pittman Jr.

Jacob Eason

Jonathan Taylor

Julian Blackmon

 

 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

7 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

If I had to select career in order (by length?)...

 

Michael Pittman Jr.

Jacob Eason

Jonathan Taylor

Julian Blackmon

 

 

Are you basing Blackmon on his already injured knee.  Just curious why he is placed below Taylor.  Not that I think Taylor will flame out but RBs have traditionally short careers.

[Four2itus]

28 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

Are you basing Blackmon on his already injured knee.  Just curious why he is placed below Taylor.  Not that I think Taylor will flame out but RBs have traditionally short careers.

Na, just a gut feeling. Nothing else involved. 

[Smonroe]

Maybe I’m taking it too seriously, but “better career” makes it tough.  A QB is going to last longer than a WR or DB, and they’ll last longer than a RB on average.   Is a guy who starts for 10 or so years at QB, but doesn’t make the pro bowl, have a better career than someone who makes two pro bowls but only plays four years?

 

For the second one, my answer is none of the above.  

[indyagent17]

With Mack and Taylor sharing time in the backfield it could be hard for either one to reach a thousand

[w87r]

1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

Maybe I’m taking it too seriously, but “better career” makes it tough.  A QB is going to last longer than a WR or DB, and they’ll last longer than a RB on average.   Is a guy who starts for 10 or so years at QB, but doesn’t make the pro bowl, have a better career than someone who makes two pro bowls but only plays four years?

 

For the second one, my answer is none of the above.  

I would say if a QB starts for 10yrs but no pro bowls is stacked up against a guy who plays 4 years with 2 pro bowls, Im leaning the 10yrs.

 

Now once it gets pushed to 6-8yrs, 4-5pb? Probably lean the arrow the other way.

 

 

Terrell Davis(6yrs) or. Joe Flacco/Jeff George/Jon Kitna/Sam Bradford(9yrs partial)

After kinda looking back at some examples. Seems to me that you choose the skill position guy with multiple pro bowls, as most QB's I looked at and qualified parameters, they weren't very good.

 

Flacco did win a title though

 

Jim Plunkett is another non pro bowl QB, but substantially more years. Steve Deberg as well.

 

 

[Dogg63]

I don't see Pittman getting 10 TDs as rookie. Happy to be shown wrong tho!

 

Apparently most folks on twitter feel better about Pittman than Campbell. I disagree, again because Pittman will be a rookie with that learning curve. Campbell already rode most of that curve...sorta...hopefully!

[aaron11]

one injury to a safety could put Blackmon in as a starter

 

i think Taylor will be good but he will be splitting carries with Mack and probably wont be a game one starter.  10 TDs is a lot for a rookie, 5 would be a good goal for Pittman 

[EastStreet]

Pittman - instantly becomes the "go-to big" given we no longer have Ebron and Funch. He'll likely be Rivers favorite RZ target, so I'd say his chances at 10 TDs aren't horrible. 

 

Taylor - his chances at getting 1000 are pretty low IMO. It would likely take an early injury to Mack. Given the miles already on Taylor, one would think we'd bring him on slowly. Also, he's coming from a scheme that used a lot of FB/TE lead, and a good mix of power and zone... Indy rarely used 2 back sets or leads, and plays mostly zone. In short, it will take some time for adjustment too. Then add in Indy's plan for Mack. If they don't plan to sign him back, they'll likely put some miles on Mack in his last year.

 

Blackmon - him taking over for Hooker would likely require a Hooker injury. Blackmon is coming off injury, and coming from a heavy man scheme. Even if he recovers well, and trusts the healing early, he'll have to learn how to play C2 zone. And IMO, he's more likely to take over SS early on, especially in passing downs. Willis has been a liability in coverage.

 

Best career? I'd say Pittman, Taylor, Blackmon, then Eason.

[Moosejawcolt]

9 hours ago, twfish said:

As long as we have ballard for the next 10 years, then I see us as serious contendors.

The teams performance this year will truly tell us what we have in Reich and Ballard. No more blaming Grigson for his failed drafts and not accumulating young talent.  Ballard has had 4 years now and these r his guys. He is the architect of this team. Reich has written off on Rivers saying his play is still top tier.  Reich is designing the offensive  scheme that he wants.  All signs point to them both being good at their job.  My biggest reservation is the D and the scheme that they favour. Not a Big fan of it so we shall c. 

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The teams performance this year will truly tell us what we have in Reich and Ballard. No more blaming Grigson for his failed drafts and not accumulating young talent.  Ballard has had 4 years now and these r his guys. He is the architect of this team. Reich has written off on Rivers saying his play is still top tier.  Reich is designing the offensive  scheme that he wants.  All signs point to them both being good at their job.  My biggest reservation is the D and the scheme that they favour. Not a Big fan of it so we shall c. 

Agree 100%, but I'd say this year is more about Reich than Ballard. There's no doubt in my mind that the roster is in a much better place than with Grigson. But Reich (and his schemes) is ultimately a product of Ballard, so Ballard too is on the hook.

 

Ultimately, short of a bunch of injury, the O has no excuse not to be good this year. I agree with you on the D. I'm not a fan of the constant Charmin soft zone. It's not that I don't like Cover 2, it's just that we need a better mix. Eberflus said last year that he intended to play more man D (Cover 1), but we really never saw it. With the added personnel (Buckner), there's really no reason we can't play more man. Perhaps that will provide a spark. There's no doubt that some additional Cover 1 would be beneficial to Hooker.

[AZColt11]

Can I say all of'em?

[funktacious2]

I chose Pittman for the first one because it says "career". For now I think Taylor may end up being the better player, but he is a RB and he may not be able to have a better career than his WR teammate. 

 

For the second I chose Julian Backmon. 10 TDs is a LOT to expect out of a rookie WR IMO even if his size makes him a red zone threat. 1000k yards as a rookie is not unheard of for rookie RBs, but he'll be splitting with Mack so I feel iffy on that one. Eason is probably the 3rd stringer so barring injuries, it's not likely he starts. So that leaves Blackmon taking the Hooker role. It wouldn't be immediate, but I wouldn't find it too far fetched. Blackmon already looks more polished to me than Hooker did coming out, he just may not have that "ball hawk" label Hooker had and hasn't perhaps lived up to.  But he could be a big help in the run game and as long as he's good in coverage too, he could take the job by year's end. 

 

This was a good question though. I think all of those scenarios are unlikely so it was fun to speculate which was most likely.

[Scott Pennock]

I feel like we just drafted our next iteration of "Triplets"....

 

Honestly, Eason was drafted appropriately.....1st Round arm talent....4th Round pick because its based on 'projection' and 'potential'. If we are honest with ourselves and understand that he was the number 1 Pro Style QB coming out of HS in 2016, had a solid Freshman year at Georgia (in a Pro Style offense), got Wally Pipp'd and essentially didn't play for 2 full seasons while injured and in the transfer protocol - one could see why his mechanics and progressions weren't as consistent as they were his Freshman year. 

 

He should have stayed one more year, however, if he did I don't think we could have drafted a better QB next year either - let alone have a shot at him. He will Redshirt here for at least one year, maybe 2 at tops and then put up a very solid career for us. Rivers is a good role model to learn from AND he sat for 2 years behind Drew Brees......so he can teach and relate to him!

 

Michael Pittman is a polished receiver with a positive attitude, works hard on his craft and will put in the work to get better. He is a hands catcher, high points the ball and has good RAC abilities - those talents are God given. He needs refinement on his breaks and route running, but that is something that can be taught. 

 

Jonathan Taylor, what needs to be said? Bellcow RB who runs thru or around would be tacklers, blocks well, catches well, durable. Would likely be the exception to the one and done contract for Ballard's RB's.

 

Add in Patmon (who I think we stole in the 6th Round), TY, Pascal and Campbell and I think we've got our top 5 set for the next several years.

 

Blackmon is kind of a wild card to me......he used to play corner but now plays safety. Hooker, if allowed to play true CF I think would be a game changer - PFF thinks he is already even though the Colts and a lot of fans don't. So do they keep the younger version (Malik is still only 24 I believe) and don't re-sign Hooker.

 

That leaves us with Blackmon and Willis as starters with Odum as the only known commodity as a back-up.....retaining Hooker WITH Blackmon (and Willis and Odum) would allow the coaching staff to use him as the chess piece they think he is.

 

Just my $0.02....

 

[Thunderbolt]

First five(5) carries, Taylor will eclipse 100 yds easy.

[Valpo2004]

I doubt Taylor gets to 1000 mostly because he's going to be splitting time with Mack.  Regardless he will have the most notable season of the rookies and is therefore the most likely to get 1000 yards.  

 

Biggest reason is RB.  RB is not a position that takes rookies a long time to learn.  So his position is naturally going to get more playing time and he will likely push close to a 50/50 split with Mack unless one starts to show himself over time to be significantly superior.

 

I think Campbell comes on as the clear #2 this year.  WR takes some time to learn but people don't remember that and expect Campbell to drop a thousand his rookie year.  When he doesn't do that people mentally check him out of their heads as a bust and start paying attention to the shiny new object (Pittman).  Thing is Pittman is going to need his time to learn too.  So he will not put up a ton of stats this season and everyone will think he sucks.  

[chad72]

Longevity and position played narrows it down to Pittman and Eason for having a productive career.

 

If by productive career, we mean that Joseph Addai had a productive career even if he fizzled out past his rookie contract, then Taylor.

 

If the player productivity includes longevity of about a decade, Pittman and Eason. RB and safety are brutal positions to play for a decade at a high level in the NFL.

[w87r]

Starting to get a little pumped up aboit Eason.

 

Coaching staff just loves the guy and everything they are seeing from him

 

Keep talking about how lucky we were to get a talent like that so late in the draft.

 

Obviously has things to work in, nit won't be rushed into action.

 

Future is bright Colts fans.